I never said I dont FOLLOW the low man rule when I'm jumping at a DZ that uses it, or that I don't have the skills to do so. I said I hate it, and I stated why. Nobody disagreeing with me is going to change my mind. "My mentality" hasn't killed anyone or so much as broken a bone in my own body so far. But I have seen the "low man rule" kill other people.

I'm with you...blindly following the low man is plain stupid. I may do it, even have the skills to, but that doesn't mean I like it or agree with it.

I'm with you...blindly following the low man is plain stupid. I may do it, even have the skills to, but that doesn't mean I like it or agree with it.

Quote:

Land out if you disagree, but don't blindly follow the low man. As others have stated, it works best this way. Especially if the winds are 15 knots or so. Any jumper under a 2.0 WL canopy for whom it is dangerous or possibly fatal to land downwind can then save themselves from their poor decision in electing to jump such a small parachute that they may have to land downwind one day.

I actually always liked this rule for one reason. Usually after a load has to land downwind you can tell by the stains on jumpsuits who is under the proper canopy for their skill level and who isn't. You can often tell by who is complaining or not in the packing area, as well . I will admit, however, that a low man rule may not be the best for all drop zones. You obviously need enough room for dissenters to land out.

I'm assuming my almost complete disagreement with some very experienced jumpers here is purely through my own inexperience and lack of understanding. I still don't get it. Having someone make the landing direction choice at the last minute just seems dangerous to me. The "land out if you don't like it" rule is dependent on there being some viable outs when the first person down makes their choice. The "the landing area is closed once anyone else contradicts the first person down" rule has the same drawback. Other people have stated before that it's possible to mistake the landing direction when you're up high. So even without counting the people who choose to land which ever way they please (no rule will ever fix those people), people actually making an effort to follow the FPD rule can end up screwed.

I've been told to plan the dive & dive the plan. I've been told to plan my landing pattern and fly it. I don't understand how anyone here can then go on to tell me that one person deciding at the last minute is a viable alternative given the seemingly very good reasoning behind planning.

Of course there are scenarios where I need to change my pattern and possibly change my landing area on the fly but why on earth would I want to do that on every jump?

I guess it's pretty clear from this discussion why we're still getting fatalities from canopy collisions. If we can't even agree on the best method of setting a landing direction, how the hell do we expect it to get better? (not including people just doing dumb shit, that'll never change)

I actually always liked this rule for one reason. Usually after a load has to land downwind you can tell by the stains on jumpsuits who is under the proper canopy for their skill level and who isn't.

BS. If I *must* make a downwind landing in high winds or other less-than-ideal conditions, my primary means of landing will be a PLF. Standing up the landing isn't important - nor are stains on my jumpsuit. Only having the ability to walk away is.

In reply to:

You can often tell by who is complaining or not in the packing area, as well. I will admit, however, that a low man rule may not be the best for all drop zones. You obviously need enough room for dissenters to land out.

If the low man decides to make a downwinder 'just for the hell of it' or because they are an idiot, hell yeah I'll be complaining. Just because of their incompetence or for their thrill I now have to expose myself to a potentially dangerous downwind landing in high winds, OR to the dangers of landing off in an unknown area. If the low man is so hell-bent on going downwind, why not make them land off?

Having said all that, I am a newbie who'll sit down to see the experienced jumpers get more experienced.

If the low man decides to make a downwinder 'just for the hell of it' or because they are an idiot, hell yeah I'll be complaining. Just because of their incompetence or for their thrill I now have to expose myself to a potentially dangerous downwind landing in high winds, OR to the dangers of landing off in an unknown area. If the low man is so hell-bent on going downwind, why not make them land off?

Quote:

Looks great in writing, but it's not always how it plays out. How are you going to get the low man, who may not be determined until the last 30 seconds of the skydive, to land out?

It also looks great in writing when people state that one should select a canopy under which they can safely land out or in any direction. Many people have expressed that view on these boards. But again it's not always how it is. Many jumpers are under canopies that for them are dangerous in such scenarios. I don't feel the rules should encourage this. Sooner or later every jumper has to contend with landing off or downwind and it should not be significant danger to a licensed skydiver. If you have to land in the landing area into the wind to land safely, you need a bigger canopy.

As far as idiots go, well, have their ass chewed out by the DZO/STA/younameit will help.. If the low man are not intending/knowing they are landing downwind until 30secs before touchdown they are dangers to themselves and others. How is the first-time-off-radio student to plan for this kind of behaviour? Their skillset is at that point quite limited as might their options be if the winds are high-ish.

Anyway, if a DZ has so many outs available, then an "intentional downwind-landing area" (ie swoop lane) could easily be set up, allowing others to land into the wind.

Quote:

Many jumpers are under canopies that for them are dangerous in such scenarios. I don't feel the rules should encourage this. Sooner or later every jumper has to contend with landing off or downwind and it should not be significant danger to a licensed skydiver. If you have to land in the landing area into the wind to land safely, you need a bigger canopy.

And how is unexpectedly forcing such a person to land downwind in the landing area any safer?

It's pretty straightforward why this rule was created and why it still exists: Everybody landing in one area should be heading one direction

Arguments about last-minute-decisions needing to be made indicate that people don't understand the idea of intentionally creating vertical separation between canopies. Hang out in brakes and watch what everyone else is doing. I'm talking about holding in brakes at 2,500 ft... not on final approach... hold brakes up high to create space. These days it's almost guaranteed that someone under a canopy loaded higher than yours is busy heading fast to the landing area. Hang out in brakes up high and observe.

Suppose you're under a highly loaded canopy and there are a few others like that around you... wait in brakes and when the pattern is set, then have at it. If you're the low person under a small canopy... go read the wind sock and set the pattern yourself... or obey the DZ's rule if direction has been pre-determined.

It's so simple that it's easy to do this right. I can't understand blaming deaths on this rule instead of blaming it on poor decisions made by individuals who ran into other people.

I can't stand the first man down rule. It creates a number of safety hazzards in my opinion:

1. People are expected to keep their eyes on the landing area to make sure they spot the first person's direction instrad of scanning their immediate surroundings for other canopies.

2. The second person down may have already set themselves up to land in one direction when they get passed by someone else. Now what is the third man supposed to do?

3. AFF students (off radio) are often landing well after everyone else is down. How are they supposed to know which way to land?

I prefer a tetrahedron or pre-declared landing direction. I fail to see why this is not a better solution. Some people have said that they prefer the first-man down rule in places where the winds are strong, but change direction. Why is a mystery direction set by a swooper preferable to a predetermined direction even in those cases? How is someone supposed to elect to land off because they don't like the direction if they don't know what that direction is until 10 seconds before they land?

Trying to follow the first man down rule is like trying to be safe at a DZ where the DZO walks over to the windsock and holds it at some random angle just as you get on your base leg. It is unsafe.

>People are expected to keep their eyes on the landing area to make sure they >spot the first person's direction instrad of scanning their immediate surroundings >for other canopies.

You always have to watch for other canopies. Not looking for other canopies means that a) you won't see a potential collision and b) you won't see which way the people before you land.

>The second person down may have already set themselves up to land in one >direction when they get passed by someone else. Now what is the third man >supposed to do?

Land the same way they do. (If they were passed by someone else it means the first two are going in the same direction.)

>AFF students (off radio) are often landing well after everyone else is down. How >are they supposed to know which way to land?

Students and tandems generally land any way they can. This generally isn't a problem because a) there aren't that many students per load and b) they open higher and have much larger canopies. In DZ's where there are a lot of them in the air with other jumpers, typically there's another landing area for them.

Why is a mystery direction set by a swooper preferable to a predetermined direction even in those cases?

The different landing areas can have jumpers landing in different directions, so long as all jumpers in the same landing area land in the same direction. A swooper landing in the swoop area will not set the pattern for those of us landing in the main landing area, nor the student area. If you're uncomfortable, you can always land out, as the area is huge.

You always have to watch for other canopies. Not looking for other canopies means that a) you won't see a potential collision and b) you won't see which way the people before you land.

If I'm watching the landing area, I can't simultaneously be scanning my immediate surroundings. I thinking about people in the first group down, before the landing direction has been set.

In reply to:

Land the same way they do. (If they were passed by someone else it means the first two are going in the same direction.)

I meant passed vertically. Let me be more clear: If jumper A is on final to land to the East, and jumper B beats him to the grounds by a couple seconds but lands to the North, is jumper C, already on a southerly base leg for an East landing, supposed to turn around 180 degree to land North? How are you supposed to plan ahead? How is jumper D (assuming landing in alphabetical order like most large DZ's dictate) supposed to be able to predict when jumper C is going to decide? First man down can easily result in bedlam for those already in the pattern before the first guy touches down.

You have to be. People can land the "wrong" direction (according to what you think the direction should be) no matter what the rules at the DZ are. If you can't check your surroundings while watching the landing area, you should upsize to give you more time to do all that.

>If jumper A is on final to land to the East, and jumper B beats him to the grounds >by a couple seconds but lands to the North, is jumper C, already on a southerly >base leg for an East landing, supposed to turn around 180 degree to land North?

Nope. He then lands out.

No matter what the rules at a drop zone are, every jumper has to be able to:

a) watch the pattern, the canopies near him and the landing area b) be prepared to take evasive action if people land the opposite direction than he's expecting c) land downwind if absolutely necessary.

You have to be. People can land the "wrong" direction (according to what you think the direction should be) no matter what the rules at the DZ are. If you can't check your surroundings while watching the landing area, you should upsize to give you more time to do all that.

Time is not the issue. I, like most people, only have eyes in the front of my head. If I happen to be upwind and holding while the first guy is landing whatever way he wants, I can't both look where I'm going and determine the landing direction. And really, I'm not talking about me, Dan G, I'm talking about the newer licensed jumper or advanced student who is already dealing with a high mental load. Now you're expecting him to rearrange his landing pattern because somebody else decided to land crosswind.

In reply to:

Nope. He then lands out.

That's fucking hard core. At most DZ's if a jumper in on his base leg, landing out is no longer an option. He needs to land in the landing area. I'm not talking about the guy at 2,000ft who doesn't like what he sees, I'm talking about the guy at 400ft.

In reply to:

No matter what the rules at a drop zone are, every jumper has to be able to:

a) watch the pattern, the canopies near him and the landing area b) be prepared to take evasive action if people land the opposite direction than he's expecting c) land downwind if absolutely necessary.

Sure, but at DZ's with a first-man down rule that jumper must also be able to unnecessarily readjust his landing pattern at the last second on every single load.

I simply don't understand the resistance to a set landing direction or a stable direction determining device like a large tetrahedron.

And no one has yet to explain why the first-man down rule would ever be superior.

>If jumper A is on final to land to the East, and jumper B beats him to the grounds by a couple seconds but lands to the North, is jumper C, already on a southerly base leg for an East landing, supposed to turn around 180 degree to land North?

Nope. He then lands out.

Oh great. The Jumper C guy is on his base leg and suddenly has to find an "out" because Jumper B is an idiot.

No matter what the rules at a drop zone are, every jumper has to be able to:

a) watch the pattern, the canopies near him and the landing area b) be prepared to take evasive action if people land the opposite direction than he's expecting c) land downwind if absolutely necessary.

What are you seeing? Very extremely few, if anyone, seeing the light and changing anything they currently do at their home DZ.

In spite of all the problems the FMD rule creates and it's inherent disregard for our young jumper's safety, the FMD people can only come up with...changing winds.

One can only question the sanity of those who turn a blind eye towards the fact that more downwinders are caused by the idiot hot-rods than will EVER be caused by changing winds.

The best one can do is simply avoid those DZs and people who condone the FMD rule.

It's much like the 45 degree rule. No matter how it's proven otherwise, there are still people who swear that it's the best technique for determining horizontal separation.

Oh...and you guys promoting the tetrahedron....oh how funny it is to hear your guys squeal about "chasing the windsock" anarchy.

Oh...and you guys whackin' on people about canopy skills and being able to chase the FMD, YOU of all people should be the ones able to handle cross-wind and downwind landings in the first place. Never mind the young jumpers with less than perfect skills...oh wait...you weren't considering them anyway.

Of course it's an issue. If everyone was doing 1mph, then a) everyone would have time to look around more and b) they'd have more time to react. That's why canopy collisions have increased as canopy speeds have increased.

>Now you're expecting him to rearrange his landing pattern because somebody else >decided to land crosswind.

Yes. You have to be able to do that no matter what rules your DZ has.

>I simply don't understand the resistance to a set landing direction or a stable >direction determining device like a large tetrahedron.

There's nothing wrong with that system. Nor is there anything wrong with the first person down system. Both can work; both have pluses and minuses.

>And no one has yet to explain why the first-man down rule would ever be superior.

It could help prevent landing downwind in 20kt winds. You, of course, may jump at a DZ where that sort of situation almost never happens.